4.1 Article

Lithotrites and Postoperative Fever: Does Lithotrite Type Matter? Results from the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global Study

Journal

UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS
Volume 91, Issue 3, Pages 340-344

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000351752

Keywords

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Lithotrites; Fever

Funding

  1. Olympus

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To compare the risks of fever from different lithotrites after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL). Materials and Methods: The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society (CROES) PNL database is a prospective, multi-institutional, international PNL registry. Of 5,803 total patients, 4,968 received preoperative antibiotics, were supplied with complete information and included in this analysis. The lithotrites assessed included no fragmentation, ultrasonic, laser, pneumatic and combination ultrasonic/pneumatic. Risk of fever was estimated using multivariate logistic regression with adjustment for diabetes, steroid use, a history of positive urine culture, the presence of stag horn calculi or preoperative nephrostomy, stone burden and lithotrite. Results: The overall fever rate was 10%. Pneumatic lithotrites were used in 43% of the cohort, followed by ultrasonic (24%), combination ultrasonic/pneumatic (17.3%), no fragmentation (8.4%) and laser (7.3%). Fever rates were no different between patients who underwent no or any fragmentation (p = 0.117), nor among patients when stratified by lithotrite (p = 0.429). On multivariate analysis, fragmentation was not significantly associated with fever [Odds Ratio (OR) 1.17, p = 0.413], while diabetes (OR 1.32, p = 0.048), positive urine culture (OR 2.08, p < 0.001), staghorn calculi (OR 1.80, p < 0.001) and nephrostonny (OR 1.65, p < 0.001) increased fever risk. Fever risk among lithotrites did not differ (p >= 0.128). Conclusions: Risk of post-PNL fever was not significantly different among the various lithotrites used in the CROES PNL study. Copyright (C) 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available